In Criminal Writ Petition No. 97 of 2023, the Court allowed the petition filed by petitioners facing trial under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and directed the Special Judge to conclude the trial expeditiously.
Directed the concerned Special Judge to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
945-CriWP-97-2023
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
945 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 97 OF 2023
UTTAM SITARAM MUNDHE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. M. L. Paithane
h/f Mr. M. A. Golegaonkar
APP for Respondent-State : Mrs. M. A. Deshpande
CORAM :MANGESH S. PATIL AND
M. M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATED :08 MARCH 2023
PER COURT :-
. Heard both sides.2.The petitioners, who are facing a trial under the provisions of
the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, are seeking expeditious
disposal of the trial.
3.The record regarding pendency of the matters before the
Special Judge is not available to us. However, it appears that the trial
is part-heard. A witness has been examined long back. It is trite that
once the trial commences, it is to be conducted expeditiously.
4. We allow the Criminal Writ Petition and direct the concerned Special Judge to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.
[M. M. SATHAYE, J.] [MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]
vre
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition can be allowed to direct the concerned Special Judge to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
UTTAM SITARAM MUNDHE AND ANOTHER
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
MANGESH S. PATIL
M. M. SATHAYE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court